The Crime of Galileo: Giorgio de Santillana 1955

 The Crime of Galileo by Giorgio de Santillana | Goodreads

A Review

Msg. Santillana was a science history professor at MIT and is mentioned as an example of how the science community takes seriously the need for the study of where the science comes from in addition to what the science says and does. The subject of the book is the minutia of the trial that found Galileo guilty of some kind of heresy that landed him under house arrest for some extended period. It is the story of how Galileo, using the telescope, observed the motion of celestial bodies, discovering the moons of Jupiter and having proof that existing Church doctrine was incorrect regarding the Ptolemaic vs the Copernican theories of the solar system. The author relates that the Catholic Church wasn’t persecuting Galileo for his studies or it’s conclusions, but that Galileo was a carnival pitchman demanding that his scientific doctrine of the mechanics of the universe displace the existing curriculum of the Church Sanctioned Universities.

 

That confusing enough for you?  It was hard reading at first. The rhythm is a little wordy and the author does that annoying thing of citing quotes in the original language without translation.

My first reaction is jaded cynicism, an odd term that makes me sad. Just exhausted from consuming the effort to justify the obvious incompetence of historical figures making bad decisions out of pride and hubris and then doubling down for pride and hubris. Urban VIII, Galileo, the Jesuits, the Dominicans, the Roman Inquisition, the Spanish Inquisition, the Catholics vs the Protestants. All were characters in this drama doing what they usually do in dramas like this. Denying responsibility and blaming someone else. There are some interesting points to this story which I was unaware of.

 

The machinery of the Inquisition had been running for several hundred years at this point. Procedures and documents and responsibilities were defined and certified and authorized and reviewed and copied and indexed and inventoried every step of the way. Except for Galileo. This was a mess. Missing documents, forged documents, conflicting testimony, people died, people lied, and of course, what the meaning of the word is is. The Church authorities knew at the time and rammed it through anyway. It was a gross and public miscarriage of justice which finally was rectified when the Church authorities absolved Galileo of the crimes against him. Three hundred years later.

 

I'm really conflicted on what conclusions I should be writing about. There is the story itself. An example of institutional overreach with a healthy dose of narcissism, fanaticism and incompetence by all the individuals involved. There's also the conflict between science and faith.  There is authorized knowledge and forbidden knowledge and the existing societal institution, the Catholic Church, is the arbiter of that decision. The author focused on the trial and the irregularities of the process and procedure. He spent time sifting through the ifs and ors in how Galileo could have changed his defense and beaten an obviously flawed case but doesn't really have much to say on the Church and the Inquisitions. I couldn't quite make up my mind about the author’s tone. At times it was sarcastic concerning the actions and attitudes of the Church and at other times it was written as a member of the faithful. Msgr. Santillana doesn't appear to question the institution all that much. This is where the date of publication may be relevant, 1955.